Subjectivity Of Chinese Human Rights Development Road

Among the tides of present-day globalization of modern human rights, the understanding of human rights and selection of human rights development road by various countries are often different. A unique understanding of human rights history and selection of human rights development road in terms of grand factors such as history, culture and national conditions for developing country like China can only demonstrate the understandability and acceptability of its own human right conception and system practice, but cannot determine its own subjectivity in sense of civilization in front of powerful discourse of antecedent countries of human rights. Therefore, it is necessary to have a further accurate grasp of subjectivity of Chinese human rights development road and provide a demonstration of its civilization value to boost China’s confidence in theory and confidence in political system in respect to issues in human tights, achieve new progress in cause of human rights and fully realize the solemn promise of "the state values and safeguards human rights" set out in Chinese Constitution.The subjectivity of Chinese human rights development road is positioned mainly from the perspective of relationship between subject and object, i.e. the autonomy, self-behaving and creativity shown facing external pressure, experience of foreign concepts and systems during China’s selection of its own human rights development road as a civilization subject. Based on the imported nature of concept of human rights, pluralistic subjectivity research perspective is necessary for the research of Chinese human rights development road, which can not only make up for the defects in looking for Chineseness by research perspective of west centralism, but also can effectively make up for the defects in demonstrating Chineseness by research perspective of Chinese centralism and eclecticism. The research of Chinese human rights development road with a pluralistic subjectivity research perspective is to provide an elaboration for Chinese human rights development road in the context of China’s historical time and space from late Qing Dynasty to this day and large-scale structure of world’s human right development by means of historical and comparative method. Concretely speaking, firstly, study the autonomy, self-behaving and creativity of its human right conception and institution and practice development from an internal perspective by regarding China as a cultural entity, based on which explore the internal effect and external effect of subjective development of Chinese human rights. Since Chinese human rights development road has made positive contributions in the above two respects, so the subjective development of such cultural entity has significance of civilization. Compared with previous researches, pluralistic subjectivity research perspective provides a normative, inclusive and participatory analysis framework for Chinese human rights development road. Meanwhile, Chinese sample of human rights model also enriches and deepens the understanding of pluralistic subjectivity research perspective. For pluralistic subjectivity research perspective, the subjectivity of Chinese human rights development road is just a start, the background of variety of prospect of world’s human rights development awaits to rich by further deep and broad country human rights development road subjectivity research.Chinese human rights development road is characterized by subjectivity. Multiple external resources, ambiguous external pressure and degree of freedom of action of China as a sovereign entity support the autonomy space of Chinese human rights development together. The need of self-identification of civilization subject and complexity of China’s human rights issues are the inner motivation for essential theoretical innovation and road innovation of human rights of China. The diversity of Chinese cultural tradition and diversity of China’s internal human rights theory based on the former show that China has the ability of independent choice and creative reconstruction of its own tradition and foreign human rights theory and the ability to develop its own cause of human rights by using foreign experience. Therefore, though the conversational mode of modern Chinese and world civilization has the characteristic of compactibility, the perspective of observation is only internal if it has an intention to look for endogenous logic and significance of civilization of Chinese road by study of Chinese human rights development road---Chinese human rights development road can not be regarded as a kind of passive reaction of external pressure, and also can not be understand in the context of extension of any foreign theory.Chinese human rights development road is characterized by self-behaving. We cannot deny that there are many extraterritorial elements in Chinese human rights development road, both of the institution transplantation since late Qing Dynasty and internalization effort of international human rights criteria by modern China demonstrate the objective existence of role of China as a "learner". Therefore, the pluralistic subjectivity research perspective requires the research of Chinese human rights development road must face up to the influence of external elements, i.e. it must demonstrate whether Chinese human rights development road is a kind of "conscious imitation", "misreading" or "unsuccessful copy" of extraterritorial concepts and institutions and practical experience after China’s internalization of external pressure. By studying the goal of Chinese human rights development road and relation between China’s selective absorption and creative reconstruction of extraterritorial elements, you can discover:though the extraterritorial concepts and institutions and practical experience are by no means a symbolical presence for the formation of Chinese road, China’s selection, absorption and utilization of extraterritorial elements are based on the standard of its functional requirement. The variety of allosterisms of extraterritorial elements in Chinese concept and practical experience are the results China, a civilization subject, re-endows it with Chinese meaning according to its own needs and targets.Chinese human rights development road is not the simple collection of Chinese and foreign elements with practicability as standard, instead, it is the result of self-creation by China, a civilization subject. The pluralistic subjectivity research perspective must pay attention to the issue of sustainability if it intends to include past and the present opposition, specifically, it must give explanation as to how certain Chinese elements of Chinese human rights development road undergo historical change and how they influence and shape the historical route of Chinese human rights development and Chinese characteristics of human rights road. As for Chinese human rights concepts, the root conception, subjective conception and political liberty conception of Chinese human rights are always pluralistic since late Qing Dynasty, but these human rights concepts are the results of selective absorption of foreign resources and creative integration with different country’s traditions by speakers of different human rights discourse based on their own political belief, value preference and even their own needs and interests. The diversified human rights development program inside China has its own inheritance logic and development course, and is never the passive reaction of external pressure or simple concept and institution transplantation. The interpretation of the diversity of road by the diversity of concept implies such judgment:during the interaction between subjective and objective and interleaving history of occasionality and inevitability, there are a lot of other possibilities in Chinese human rights development road, however, even if other concepts inside China dominate China’s practice of human rights, Chinese human rights development road is still creative--there are no issues such as passive acceptance and simple imitation in so many possibilities. Only in this sense can we say that Chinese human rights development is subjective, not passive or imitative, instead, it is the creative act of subject. As for practical experience of Chinese human rights, although history offers a variety of possibilities for Chinese road, through analysis of China’s target, value preference and route preference behind China’s individual liberation process, you can discover that institutions and practices of Chinese human rights have their own unique logics, which are the results of self-creation during interaction between subjectivity and objectivity of China, a civilization subject.As for the research on the development path of country human rights at the perspective of multi-subjectivity, although it requires to correct the homogenizing cognition of the prospect of world human rights, it doesn’t mean to fragment the historical and realistic prospect of world human rights but to seek for consensus in diversity. Therefore, research on the development path of China’s human rights at the perspective of multi-subjectivity can’t just describe China logic itself as the advantages and disadvantages of its subjectivity also must be reflected on with an open attitude. Evaluation on the subjectivity of the development path of China’s human rights should take such criteria as the effect of its subjective action (externality) on other countries and ethic groups as well as on the subjective development of group members (internality). In terms of internality, there coexists positive and negative internality of China’s subjectivity in the history of continuous development China’s subjectivity. Subjectivity of the development path of China’s human rights shows not only its huge social mobilization ability but also its potential crisis at the same time. The development path of China’s human rights is such a path that it continuously explores during the history of interaction between subjectivity and objectivity to realize internal positive effect and avoid internal negative effect. Its success or failure, and forward or frustration are both the precious treasure for the development of the cause of human rights as it at least shows many possibilities that human beings can control the nature, human society and their own history. In terms of externality, an improvement upon the protection of China’s human rights occurs on the premises of the cost of independent internalizing state building and that of industrialization. China completed its state building in the war against aggression, so there exists no evil of colonialism in the building of China’s industrial basis. Public & private notion meaning "to esteem the publicness of the majority and remove the privateness of the minority" makes China maintain integral survival relying on its own power in the face of limited resources; China’s Great Harmony Complex and moral idealism also make China have a broad global perspective and cosmopolitanism tendency for the development of national cause and the cause of human rights. Standing up in the history suffering from bullying, peace-loving Chinese nation still strove to resolve the clash of civilization and differences on human rights in the context of globalization with the method of dialogue rather than confrontation, and also independently solved the survival problems of billions of population without causing any harm to any other groups in external world. All of those facts themselves are great contribution to the cause of world human rights. China’s public & private notion, Great Harmony Complex and moral idealism, etc. are all the precious spiritual wealth for human beings to develop human rights on this unpeaceful planet.There is theoretical significance as follows for the research on the development path of China’s human rights at the perspective of multi-subjectivity. Firstly, compared to the perspective of observation of such cultural centralism as Western centralism or Chinese centralism, the perspective of multi-subjectivity shows a normative, inclusive and participatory analytical framework beyond the standpoint of cultural centralism for the research on the development path of country human rights. Secondly, through study on the autonomy and self-behaving of the development path of China’s human rights, the research on the development path of China’s human rights at the perspective of multi-subjectivity reflects on and effectively responds to the unsuccessful interpretations of "Chinese characteristics", such as "Burden Theory", "Misreading Theory", "Simulation Theory" and "Theory of Extension Cord", etc., and also proposes that the research on the development path of country human rights must take internal perspective as the basis to establish the subject identities of different nationalities, countries or societies on the development path of their own human rights. Thirdly, through study on the generation and evolution of internal China’s multiple development programs for human rights in core issues of human rights such as the root concept, subjective concept and political liberty concept of human rights, their China logic and characteristics as well as the creativity of China’s individual liberation process, research on the development path of China’s human rights at the perspective of multi-subjectivity reveals how the endogenous target as well as value and path preferences shapes the systematic modality of concept of China’s human rights and affect China’s practice, thus further proves that China’s road is not the simple copy and transplantation of the system of concept and development pattern of external human rights, but the creative combination and development of multiple Chinese tradition and multiple external resources by Chinese people in the context of specific space and time. Fourthly, through effect analysis on the subjectivity of the development path of China’s human rights, research on the development path of China’s human rights at the perspective of multi-subjectivity not only reveals the contribution of the subjective development of China’s human rights to the cause of world human rights, it also objectively analyzes the positive and negative roles of China’s subjectivity under continuous change and development in the subjective development of group members, and finally proposes that there requires further exploration and improvement of China’s subjectivity in the practice of China’s human rights in the future.